↓ Skip to main content

Pointing to Visible and Invisible Targets

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Pointing to Visible and Invisible Targets
Published in
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10919-017-0270-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zoe M. Flack, Martha Naylor, David A. Leavens

Abstract

We investigated how the visibility of targets influenced the type of point used to provide directions. In Study 1, we asked 605 passersby in three localities for directions to well-known local landmarks. When that landmark was in plain view behind the requester, most respondents pointed with their index fingers, and few respondents pointed more than once. In contrast, when the landmark was not in view, respondents pointed initially with their index fingers, but often elaborated with a whole-hand point. In Study 2, we covertly filmed the responses from 157 passersby we approached for directions, capturing both verbal and gestural responses. As in Study 1, few respondents produced more than one gesture when the target was in plain view and initial points were most likely to be index finger points. Thus, in a Western geographical context in which pointing with the index finger is the dominant form of pointing, a slight change in circumstances elicited a preference for pointing with the whole hand when it was the second or third manual gesture in a sequence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 3 19%
Psychology 3 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 13%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#5,024,548
of 24,633,436 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
#172
of 394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,333
of 453,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nonverbal Behavior
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,633,436 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 453,510 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.